Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!casbah.acns.nwu.edu!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: think!barmar@bloom-beacon.mit.edu (Barry Margolin)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Thoughts on BBSs and Business Rates
Message-ID: <16104@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 16 Jan 91 08:06:34 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA
Lines: 33
Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 42, Message 2 of 6


In article <72205@bu.edu.bu.edu> ehopper@ehpcb.wlk.com (Ed Hopper)
writes:

>Issue #4. - BBS lines are more busy than others and should pay
>accordingly.

>If Southwestern Bell wishes to apply charges based upon usage, it
>should be done via rate making procedures before the PUC. The PUC
>should decide if a break with previous public policy in Texas is
>justified. Such rates should be equitable so that the proverbial
>talkative teenager also bears such a burden.  The application of
>business rates should not be used as a back door alternative to the
>imposition of a mandatory measured service tariff in Texas.

Even a family full of talkative teenagers would have a hard time tying
up a line as much as a popular BBS.  Phone companies can only offer
unlimited service at a reasonable rate so long as users don't abuse
it.

And if calling a BBS forced a measured service tariff, BBS users would
be discouraged from using them (it would be trivial to run up hundreds
of dollars of charges calling a BBS on measured service), and the
sysops would complain about the charge driving them out of hobby.  It
sounds to me like a reasonable compromise was reached; limiting a BBS
to three lines limits the amount of load that BBS can put on the
network, but still permits the service to be free.


Barry Margolin, Thinking Machines Corp.

barmar@think.com
{uunet,harvard}!think!barmar